All the prosecution needs to convict Zimmerman on his second degree murder charge is to show that the MURDER was the result of Zimmermans intentional, will "ill will, hatred or spite". That is the charge against him, not "he was in bottom guard". The "who was on top of who" is not going to convict Zimmerman.

Now, the 911 calls clearly show Zimmerman is upset right before he shoots and kills Martin. That's the state's best evidence, other than the dead body and the gun. Zimmerman's own words indicate he's angry and looking for a confrontation.

The witnesses are not very good evidence for the prosecutors, because they contradict each other. So their testimony is a bit irrelevant unless it were unanimous, which is isn't.

This case will be decided on whether or not the jury thinks Zimmerman's state of mind at the time of the 911 call indicate he was a threat to Martin.

To date there has been no evidence at all Martin would have been a threat to Zimmerman. He didn't carry a gun, or have a history of getting arrested like Zimmerman did. He also didn't have a history of making false statements before the Court, like Zimmerman did when he began collecting financial aid for his defense. He didn't obsessively call police to report "strangers".

So far Martin's biggest offenses have been posting to Facebook, and enjoying artificially colored candies.

His heart was visible, and the dismal sack that maketh excrement of what is eaten.

Join Date

Mar 2006

Posts

11,154

--

Originally Posted by W. Rabbit

All the prosecution needs to convict Zimmerman on his second degree murder charge is to show that the MURDER was the result of Zimmermans intentional, will "ill will, hatred or spite". That is the charge against him, not "he was in bottom guard". The "who was on top of who" is not going to convict Zimmerman.

Now, the 911 calls clearly show Zimmerman is upset right before he shoots and kills Martin. That's the state's best evidence, other than the dead body and the gun. Zimmerman's own words indicate he's angry and looking for a confrontation.

The witnesses are not very good evidence for the prosecutors, because they contradict each other. So their testimony is a bit irrelevant unless it were unanimous, which is isn't.

This case will be decided on whether or not the jury thinks Zimmerman's state of mind at the time of the 911 call indicate he was a threat to Martin.

To date there has been no evidence at all Martin would have been a threat to Zimmerman. He didn't carry a gun, or have a history of getting arrested like Zimmerman did. He also didn't have a history of making false statements before the Court, like Zimmerman did when he began collecting financial aid for his defense.

Way to speak emotionally and completely disregard the law. The deciding factor will be whether the jury decides Zimmerman acted within or outside very specific legal parameters, not whether he was spiteful.

The burden of proof is on the prosecution, not the defense. Beyond a reasonable doubt. Remember that phrase.

Way to speak emotionally and completely disregard the law. The deciding factor will be whether the jury decides Zimmerman acted within or outside very specific legal parameters, not whether he was spiteful.